Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Even Cyborgs Cast a Shadow: Christian Resources and Responsibilities in Response to Transhumanism

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Christian Perspectives on Transhumanism and the Church

Abstract

This chapter draws upon two meanings associated with the metaphor of shadow—as imperfect representation and constant companion—to assess the transhumanist movement and the Christian church’s response. First, the essay demonstrates that the liberal, humanistic accounts of transhumanism have their shadow side because they reflect an imperfect representation of the self and political community, and it offers a corrective drawn from the work of H. Richard Niebuhr and from Christian conceptions of covenant community. Second, the essay highlights the contributions of theologians and ethicists who have shadowed the transhumanist movement to identify both compatibility and incompatibility with the Christian worldview, and it calls upon the broader church to engage more fully rather than dismiss transhumanist insights and challenges.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Bostrom, “In Defense of Posthuman Dignity,” 202.

  2. 2.

    Young, Designer Evolution, 32.

  3. 3.

    More, Max, “True Transhumanism: A Reply to Don Ihde,” in Hansell and Grassie, H+/-: Transhumanism and Its Critics, 143.

  4. 4.

    Bostrom, “Transhumanist Values,” 11.

  5. 5.

    Ibid., 12.

  6. 6.

    Thweatt-Bates questions the transhumanist view of the human self as a disembodied center of consciousness and will that uses technology but is unaffected by it: “It is hard to miss the parallel between Neo-platonic Christian theological views of the body as ‘evil, seductive matter’ and the transhumanist view of human biological bodies as placing negative limits on human potential.” J. Jeanine Thweatt-Bates, “Artificial Wombs and Cyborg Births,” in Cole-Turner, Transhumanism and Transcendence, 109.

  7. 7.

    Ronald Cole-Turner, “Transhumanism and Christianity,” in Cole-Turner, Transhumanism and Transcendence, 198.

  8. 8.

    Garner, Stephen, “The Hopeful Cyborg,” in Cole-Turner, Transhumanism and Transcendence, 89.

  9. 9.

    Ibid., 92.

  10. 10.

    Garner suggests that the imago Dei as a metaphor for the cyborg “contains an understanding of the interdependent, embodied relationships in which humanity is caught up in the natural world; a call to agency that does not dehumanize or marginalize others; of the imperative toward beneficent agency, while also recognizing potential for maleficence; and of a recognition that human activity, while questing for the transcendent, is still rooted in the finite.” Ibid., 97.

  11. 11.

    J. Jeanine Thweatt-Bates, “Artificial Wombs and Cyborg Births,” in Cole-Turner, Transhumanism and Transcendence, 109.

  12. 12.

    Thweatt- Bates, Cyborg Selves, 11.

  13. 13.

    Niebuhr, The Responsible Self, 62–63.

  14. 14.

    Ibid., 63.

  15. 15.

    Ibid., 64.

  16. 16.

    Ibid., 65.

  17. 17.

    You find this emphasis on social solidarity within a community of interaction among a number of transhumanists. For example, Margaret Wertheim argues that “If cyberspace teaches us anything it is that the worlds we conceive … are communal projects requiring ongoing communal responsibility.” (Wertheim, The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace, 304).

  18. 18.

    Niebuhr, Radical Monotheism and Western Culture, 118.

  19. 19.

    Niebuhr, The Responsible Self, 61.

  20. 20.

    Niebuhr, Radical Monotheism and Western Culture, 110–113.

  21. 21.

    Niebuhr, Christ and Culture, 38.

  22. 22.

    Niebuhr, The Responsible Self, 62.

  23. 23.

    Ibid., 85–86.

  24. 24.

    Ibid., 65.

  25. 25.

    For a transhumanist perspective on risks, see Nick Bostrom, “Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards.” For a critical perspective, see Francis Fukuyama, Our Posthuman Future.

  26. 26.

    “Transhumanist Declaration.”

  27. 27.

    Bostrom, “ In Defense of Posthuman Dignity,” 210.

  28. 28.

    Bostrom (“Dignity and Enhancement,” 203–204) writes: “By choosing to recognize these values and to treat the world accordingly, they would be accepting some constraints on their actions. It is by accepting such constraints that they could build, or rather cultivate their Plastic World into something that has greater value than a daydream. It is also by accepting such constraints—perhaps only by doing so—that it would be possible for them to preserve their own Dignity as a Quality. This dignity would not consist in resisting or defying the world. Rather, theirs would be a dignity of the strong, consisting in self-restraint and the positive nurturance of both internal and external values.”

  29. 29.

    Peters, Ted, “Progress and Provolution: Will Transhumanism Leave Sin Behind?” in Cole-Turner, Transhumanism and Transcendence, 82.

  30. 30.

    Hughes, Citizen Cyborg, 79.

  31. 31.

    Kathryn Hayles provides this critique: “The basis for a shared society—that is, the contract that reciprocally benefits both participants—breaks down when those who have nothing to give outnumber those who have much to give, for any contract must then be unequal and hence unfair to the privileged” (Hayles, How We Became Posthuman, 223).

  32. 32.

    Bostrom, “Dignity and Enhancement.”

  33. 33.

    Niebuhr, “The Idea of Covenant in American Democracy.” In general, one might question how the idea of covenant can engage a broad, religiously diverse audience, including individuals who do not subscribe to a higher power. With regard to those of other religious traditions, the Council for a Parliament of World Religions has endorsed Toward a Global Ethic (https://parliamentofreligions.org) whose principles embody most of the responsibilities inherent in the notion of a covenant political community. With regard to those who do not subscribe to a higher power, the U.N. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights embodies explicitly covenantal language and the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights embodies implicitly most of the principles of a covenant political community. Thus, the idea of covenant and the responsibilities it entails is not a foreign concept to these groups.

  34. 34.

    Bostrom, “In Defense of Posthuman Dignity,” 210.

  35. 35.

    Elazar, Covenant and Polity in Biblical Israel, 31.

  36. 36.

    For a fuller treatment of the moral obligations of political community from a covenantal perspective, see Allen, Love & Conflict, chapter 9.

  37. 37.

    Niebuhr, The Purpose of the Church and Its Ministry, 26.

  38. 38.

    See Richard H. Niebuhr’s classic text, Christ and Culture.

  39. 39.

    See Stassen et al., Authentic Transformation, chapters 1, 4.

  40. 40.

    Galatians 3:28.

  41. 41.

    Peters, Playing God, 197.

  42. 42.

    “Fearfully and Wonderfully Made: A Policy on Human Biotechnologies.”

  43. 43.

    The edited volume by Cole-Turner, Transhumanism and Transcendence, is an excellent resource in this regard. See also Mercer and Trothen, Religion and Transhumanism.

  44. 44.

    Peters, Playing God, 210.

  45. 45.

    Grassie, William, “Millennialism at the Singularity: Reflections on the Limits of Ray Kurzweil’s Exponential Logic,” in Hansell and Grassie, H+/-: Transhumanism and Its Critics, 266.

  46. 46.

    Peters, Playing God, 212.

  47. 47.

    Langdon Winner argues that we need to think about what it means to be human, and rather than focus on “human nature” we need to focus on the “human condition” (Winner, “Resistance is Futile: The Posthuman Condition and Its Advocates,” in Baillie and Casey, Is Human Nature Obsolete?, 405). See also Ted Peters who suggests that the connection between transhumanist goals and laissez-faire capitalism and its emphasis on profits is a major concern. ( Peters, “Progress and Provolution: Will Transhumanism Leave Sin Behind?” in Cole-Turner, Transhumanism and Transcendence, 72).

  48. 48.

    Peters, Ted, “Transhumanism and the Posthuman Future,” in Hansell and Grassie, H+/-: Transhumanism and Its Critics, 162.

Bibliography

  • Allen, Joseph. 1984. Love & Conflict: A Covenantal Model of Christian Ethics. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baillie, Harold W., and Timothy K. Casey, eds. 2004. Is Human Nature Obsolete? Genetics, Bioengineering, and the Future of the Human Condition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, Nick. 2002. Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards. Journal of Evolution and Technology 9 (1): 1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005a. Transhumanist Values. Journal of Philosophical Research 30 (Supplement): 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005b. In Defense of Posthuman Dignity. Bioethics 19 (3): 202–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Dignity and Enhancement. In Human Dignity and Bioethics: Essays Commissioned by the President’s Council on Bioethics,ed. Edmund D. Pellegrino, Adam Schulman, and Thomas W. Merrill, 173–206. Washington, DC. https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/559351/human_dignity_and_bioethics.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

  • Cole-Turner, Ronald, ed. 2011. Transhumanism and Transcendence: Christian Hope in an Age of Technological Enhancement. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015. Going Beyond the Human: Christians and Other Transhumanists. Dialog: A Journal of Theology 54 (1): 20–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elazar, Daniel. 1995. Covenant and Polity in Biblical Israel: Biblical Foundations and Jewish Expressions. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • “Fearfully and Wonderfully Made: A Policy on Human Biotechnologies.” National Council of Churches. November 8, 2006. http://nationalcouncilofchurches.us/common-witness/2006/biotech.php

  • Fukuyama, Francis. 2002. Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansell, Gregory R., and William Grassie, eds. 2011. H+/-: Transhumanism and Its Critics. Philadelphia: Metanexus Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayles, Katherine. 1999. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, James. 2004. Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurzweil, Ray. 2006. The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, Calvin, and Tracy J. Trothen, eds. 2015. Religion and Transhumanism: The Unknown Future of Human Enhancement. Santa Barbara: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niebuhr, H. Richard. 1951. Christ and Culture. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1954. The Idea of Covenant in American Democracy. Church History 23 (2): 126–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1956. The Purpose of the Church and Its Ministry. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1960. Radical Monotheism and Western Culture. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1963. The Responsible Self: An Essay in Christian Moral Philosophy. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, Ted. 2003. Playing God: Genetic Determinisms and Human Freedom. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stassen, Glen H., D.M. Yeager, and John Howard Yoder. 1996. Authentic Transformation: A New Vision of Christ and Culture. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thweatt-Bates, Jeanine. 2012. Cyborg Selves: A Theological Anthropology of the Posthuman. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • “Transhumanist Declaration.” Humanity+. March, 2009. http://humanityplus.org/philosophy/transhumanist-declaration/

  • Wertheim, Margaret. 2000. The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, Simon. 2006. Designer Evolution: A Transhumanist Manifesto. Amherst: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Religious Studies, Le Moyne College, Syracuse, NY, USA

    Fred Glennon

Authors
  1. Fred Glennon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fred Glennon .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Samford University, Birmingham, AL, USA

    Steve Donaldson

  2. Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Ron Cole-Turner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Glennon, F. (2018). Even Cyborgs Cast a Shadow: Christian Resources and Responsibilities in Response to Transhumanism. In: Donaldson, S., Cole-Turner, R. (eds) Christian Perspectives on Transhumanism and the Church. Palgrave Studies in the Future of Humanity and its Successors. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90323-1_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation